Evaluation of the validity and response burden of patient self-report measures of the pain assessment screening tool and outcomes registry (Pastor)

Abstract

Background: In 2009, the Army Pain Management Task Force was chartered. On the basis of their findings, the Department of Defense recommended a comprehensive pain management strategy that included development of a standardized pain assessment system that would collect patient-reported outcomes data to inform the patient-provider clinical encounter. The result was the Pain Assessment Screening Tool and Outcomes Registry (PASTOR). The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and response burden of the patient-reported outcome measures in PASTOR. Methods: Data for analyses were collected from 681 individuals who completed PASTOR at baseline and follow-up as part of their routine clinical care. The survey tool included self-report measures of pain severity and pain interference (measured using the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating scale). PROMIS measures of pain correlates also were administered. Validation analyses included estimation of score associations among measures, comparison of scores of known groups, responsiveness, ceiling and floor effects, and response burden. Results: Results of psychometric testing provided substantial evidence for the validity of PASTOR self-report measures in this population. Expected associations among scores largely supported the concurrent validity of the measures. Scores effectively distinguished among respondents on the basis of their self-reported impressions of general health. PROMIS measures were administered using computer adaptive testing and each, on average, required less than 1 minute to administer. Statistical and graphical analyses demonstrated the responsiveness of PASTOR measures over time.